81–90 of 256 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison.
Professor Fate! (Wait, we're just naming random people who come to mind, right? That's what this thread is about, I gather?)
So I provided two very good examples. Donald Trump is another. Unless you believe that Steve Jobs and Larry Ellison were/are expected to be polite constantly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I really hate it when people act this way, now I feel the obligation to try and read their mind and figure out if what I'm doing is upsetting them or not.
The responsibility to be socially aware is your own. The responsibility to not put people in awkward situations is your own. One of the many reasons not to flirt with people in service jobs.
What would you suggest the socially awkward person who doesn't understand that they're stalking do? You can't simply wish people were more socially self-aware, and to do so ignores a very large population of people who have trouble with social situations for reasons beyond their control.
Most of these amount to libel, at worst. File suit. There are excellent reasons for police to be uninvolved in what amounts to people saying mean things, even if those mean things are directed at your employer or friends.
Would you be so calm if someone hired a PI to spy on you, then mailed photoshopped pictures and faked evidence to every potential employer claiming you were a child molester? There is definitely the potential to chill free speech and we need to be careful; however there is also such thing as harassment. We need to figure out where the line is, then task a department in the FBI with enforcing it. If even 1% of the peo…
Open the door to police investigation of such disputes and you will have cause to regret it. You think the "trolls" you are so concerned about are above faking such a harassment case and filing the same charges against you? Are you really confident the cops are going to use their inestimable judgment and come to the right conclusion?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it were a one-off incident I would agree with you. But a consistent pattern like this over years is stalking, and either is or should be a crime. In my opinion this clearly summarizes why: > For Franks, a big theme is that the “fundamental feeling of security that most people take for granted is taken away.” She has spoken to hundreds, maybe thousands, of victims in her research, who describe constant feelings “ha…
So sue! That and restraining orders are designed for exactly this .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
He may very well be mentally ill. This sounds like something a trump supporter might say
You were doing so well.
Really believing in this value is more important to our democracy than who wins the presidency.
Edit: in short, we can all learn something from Linus Torvalds.
http://blog.erratasec.com/2015/11/we-should-all-follow-linus...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or just telling him directly to stop himself. Maybe she did, but she didn't say she did. "Don't message me SO MUCH or I will BLOCK YOU" isn't quite the same thing as DON'T CONTACT ME AGAIN. A gentleman would get the hint, but a gentleman wouldn't be such a creepy asshole to begin with. You don't legally have the right to dictate to someone how they talk to you. You do legally have the right to cut off all contact wit…
"Don't message me SO MUCH or I will BLOCK YOU" sounds exactly like "I told my cyber stalker that if he didn't ease up on how much he was messaging me - my phone was beeping multiple times per day, bothering me at all hours - he could forget about breakfast in the morning from here on out - the next time he showed up at my apartment, I'd send him home with the night bus as soon as we were done having sex." (not a quot…
There's a moment in the pilot of The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt where the women are rescued from the bunker and put on a daytime talk show and Matt Lauer asks one of the women how she ended up in the bunker: "I had waited on Reverend Richard at a York Steak House I worked at, and one night he invited me out to his car to see some baby rabbits, and I didn’t want to be rude, so… here we are." And Matt Lauer responds: "I…
Sorry, but I'm going to have to call out this statement as sexist. There are also several other strange "facts" being passed around in other comments which are similarly biased. To be clear, I'm not calling you sexist. In fact, I think your comment makes a great point about submission to societal pressures leading to these sorts of problems.
Getting back to the quoted statement, I strongly suspect both genders are equally susceptible to being manipulated by societal pressures. I also don't think men find it hard to understand this. If there's data to show otherwise, I welcome it. In its absence, I believe it more wise to hold this neutral view rather than perpetuating a gender bias.
Let's use Curb Your Enthusiasm as a means to elucidate my argument. The lead character in that show gets into all manner of uncomfortable and disastrous situations as a result of bending to societal pressures; not wanting to be "rude". The lead character is male and I'll bet more guys than not can relate. Perhaps not to the same scale as what is portrayed in the show, because the show is meant to be entertaining, but perhaps more on the level of The Office (US) awkwardness.
So I doubt that societal malleability differs between the genders. You're still right in bringing it up, though, because indeed this habit of not wanting to be rude is clearly a contributing factor to cyberstalking cases. I just don't think it's what leads to a greater number of females being victims versus males.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've found they also have an amazing ability to make excuses for the behaviors of others. I had an ex who got into a lot of sketchy situations because she refused to believe people were exactly who they were telling her they were. Guys would do inappropriate things that clearly bothered her, but she would claim they were "joking" or believe she misunderstood, etc. etc. So she wouldn't set any boundaries, and of cours…
While many people are like this, it seems a bit unfair to stereotype all women as gullible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So sue! That and restraining orders are designed for exactly this .
So why have crimes at all? If someone steals from you, or assaults you, you can always sue. The thing is, that shouldn't be the victim's responsibility.
Let me tell you who is a good candidate for a "cyberstalking" charge. You maintain a database of police involved in questionable shootings. When one of them gets canned from their present department, you track the new PD they're foisted onto, and make sure to let the local BLM chapter know about the bad apple they're about to get, and a lurid description of what you think their crimes are. Why, that sounds worthy of some prosecutorial resources (election year, after all). Aren't you glad you made being mean on the internet a crime?
Get a fucking restraining order. It's ridiculously easy; too easy, in fact, to the point where they're routinely used as leverage in other civil disputes. Violation of restraining orders is a crime. This is a solved problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You were doing so well.
This, please don't engage in personal attacks on HN, but much, much more importantly, please don't be a partisan fascist. Trump supporters are not your enemy and they are not subhumans incapable of reason. They disagree with you about who we should elect and the direction our country should take, but their voices matter. There is no substantive difference between thinking Trump supporters are mentally deficient and t…